On Friday, January 19, 2007 @ 8:35 PM, Darryl Gregorash wrote:
On 2007-01-19 18:59, Carlos E. R. wrote:
<snip>
And you save some disk space, and some update resources if Yast want's to update something you don't use, and less confussions... Yes, the right thing is removing it.
And from now on, knowing what he does, the correct thing is not to let it install in the first place -- during package selection when installing/upgrading.
You probably heard a rather loud noise coming from this direction when syslog-ng became available as an alternative to syslogd. That was just me cheering wildly :-)
-- This space for rent. Inquire within.
Well, I have always done upgrade installs because I have certain software that is spread throughout the directories of the system (Oracle, for instance) that would be very difficult to re-install from scratch (difficult for me anyway). So, the upgrade process says something like there are n number of packages being deleted. True you can go in and look at the details and see everything being deleted, added, etc., but how, for instance, would the average SUSE "user" know that syslog-ng was a replacement for syslogd. As a matter of fact, since it was a replacement, the installation process should have trashed it automatically, like it does for most packages that are becoming obsolete for that upgrade. For those doing clean installs this is a non-issue, but when upgrading you're pretty much relying on that upgrade process to handle these things. Understandably, constructing an upgrade procedure that can correctly handle all combinations and delete just what needs deleting in all cases, etc. would be pretty much impossible, so you're left with some situations like this one, where an obsolete package was left in place along with the new package that was supposed to take its place. Just something you have to live with if you're not doing clean installs I guess. Greg Wallace -- To unsubscribe, e-mail: opensuse+unsubscribe@opensuse.org For additional commands, e-mail: opensuse+help@opensuse.org